Page 47 - The Errors the American National Academy of Sciences
P. 47

The NAS's Error on Natural Selection



            They seek to give the impression that no matter how random the muta-
            tions selected by natural selection may be, since natural selection se-
            lects those that are best adapted, the overall result is not random. It is as
            though a conscious mechanism entered the equation.
                 However, anyone examining the subject a little deeper will see

            through the deception here: Natural selection is not a conscious
            mechanism capable of planning or foresight. This is most clearly re-
            vealed in the study of irreducibly complex organs: these structures
            only provide any benefit to an organism when they are fully formed.
            For instance, during the transition from water to land, which evolu-
            tionists so fondly dream of, natural selection would not select
            changes in a fish that might have produced only a few components of
            a lung. A structure that lacks any of the characteristics of a perfect
            lung is of no benefit to a land creature. Since natural selection is also

            unable to calculate that a fish might shortly emerge onto land and
            would therefore need a lung—and that the lung would therefore need
            to undergo many intermediate stages waiting for the accumulation of
            alterations—it would not select those changes. In this way, an animal
            with only a few of the necessary changes would be eliminated.
                 As the world-famous historian of biology William Coleman
            indicates:

                 The organism, being a functionally integrated whole each part of
                 which stood in close relation to every other part, could not, under
                 pain of almost immediate extinction, depart significantly from the
                 norms established for the species by the first anatomical rule.
                 Amajor change, for example, a sharp increase in the heart beat or
                 the diminution by half of the kidney and thus a reduction in renal
                 secretion, would by itself have wrought havoc with the general con-
                 stitution of the animal. In order that an animal might persist after a
                 change of this magnitude it would be necessary that the other or-





                                             45
   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52